Editorial | This president fails to understand strong leadership

Aside from marriage equality, President Barack Obama and I don't agree on much of anything. I know I'm breaking major ground as a former Republican Party chairman disavowing the beliefs of a sitting Democratic president. You'll also be shocked to know I have a photo of Ronald Reagan in my home office. Take a second to collect yourself.

But policy is only one measure of a president's effectiveness and eventual greatness. Leadership is what we are ultimately looking for in our candidates. In fact, look back at our modern elections and the candidate who sells their leadership qualities more effectively usually wins the day. Nothing should be more important to a politician's résumé than the ability to lead people. I wish President Obama understood this better.

When challenged by the press on his inability to lead Congress, our president responded, "You seem to suggest that somehow these folks [in Congress] have no responsibilities, and that my job is to somehow get them to behave. That's their job."

How many people have you followed willfully after they've insulted you in public? Could you reasonably expect cooperation from the target of those dismissive words? If your boss has a problem over the long haul getting the office to "behave," shouldn't he or she be the one who ultimately loses their job? Obama unequivocally expects opponents and allies to march in lockstep with him merely because he's the president. Failing to do so can only be because his followers aren't behaving. In reality, it's because he lacks the essential leadership tools of any successful president.

If President Obama understood the importance of leadership, he would not have brought Congressman Paul Ryan out in front of the world only to chastise him during a speech in 2011. Only while running for re-election did he claim he didn't know Ryan would be there. But that's a hard one to believe. These events are generally highly staged with guest lists approved in advance.

He would not have made the Osama bin Laden killing about himself. An inspirational leader would have never included that the SEAL team went in "at my direction," only wanting his team to get the accolades. He should know you earn even more praise when you don't give it to yourself.

When given the initial opportunity to steer the sequester cuts from airport operations to reduce the pain on the American people, he rejected a gift-wrapped proposal by Republicans. It doesn't take an economist to know we can surely cut $85 billion from our multitrillion-dollar budget without such a negative impact. When your budget has $136,555 earmarked for teachers at two universities to retrace Chaucer's "Canterbury Tales" in England, it becomes clear the pain was brought on to make a political point. This isn't the hopeful leadership we were once promised.

A President Obama concerned about the importance of strong leadership would meet with Sen. Mitch McConnell with some regularity and keep the lines of communication open. I object to Sen. McConnell's infamous statement about his No. 1 political objective vis-à-vis Obama, but being the country's leader is about staying above the fray. The president's work is to lead the nation, and closing off communication with the opposition party's leading politician, self-justified or not, does not elicit confidence in his abilities to do so.

Are congressional Republicans guilty of acting below their station from time to time? I'll concede that point. But what is more below the station of any leader, much less the president, than to still be blaming your predecessor five years after they last held the job? It would be hard to imagine the CEO of Fortune 500 company could perform that song and dance for half that time and get away with it.

Top level leaders do not look for justification to bring others down. They find the positives in people and lift them up. I can't imagine a job more difficult than leading a group of politicians angling for your demise. But great leaders can and have navigated these waters before.

That's why most people are not leaders. They can afford to have petty differences and hold grudges against others. There is no real consequence to their actions beyond their immediate sphere of influence. More and more Americans measure potential leaders through the prism of what works in their own realities. Many believe leadership begins and ends with having a title.

But true leadership only begins with the words printed on their business card. In order to get people to follow your lead, you must invest in them. You must make their needs many times more important than your own. You must deal with conflict privately and not publicly embarrass those who work under your guidance if you want them to follow.

We all know of the famous bond forged between President Ronald Reagan and Speaker Tip O'Neill in the 1980s. Imagine if Reagan had refused to meet with O'Neill because of their personal differences. Would he have still gone down as one of our greatest presidents?

Despite my disagreements with our president, I do want our country to succeed. And strong leadership is essential to our success. Strong leadership I unfortunately don't see from President Obama.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Email this article

Editorial | This president fails to understand strong leadership

Aside from marriage equality, President Barack Obama and I don't agree on much of anything. I know I'm breaking major ground as a former Republican Party chairman disavowing the beliefs of a sitting